Let the report of the commissioners be set aside, on the ground that Enoch Sawder, through whose lands the road is laid off, had not notice.
Sawyer v. Hamilton, 5 N.C. 253, 1 Mur. 253 (1809)
July 1809
·
Supreme Court of North Carolina
5 N.C. 253, 1 Mur. 253
Sawyer v. Hamilton.
From Camden.
The General Assembly having authorised, the County Courts of Camden and Pasquotank to appoint commissioners to lay out a road, and having authorised John Hamilton to erect toll-gates on the said road and exact toll; the commissioners laid out the road across the lands of Enoch Sawyer; and their report being returned to Court, was set aside, upon the ground that Sawyer had no notice.
The General Assembly, in the year 1805, passed an act authorising the County Courts of Camden and Pas-quotank to appoint commissioners to lay out a road from Elizabetli-city, in Pasquotanft, to Indian-town, in Camden, on which road John Hamilton was authorised to erect toll-gates and exact toll. The commissioners appointed under this act proceeded and laid out the road, and returned their report to Camden County Court. A considerable portion of the road was laid out across the lands of Enoch Sawyer, the commissioners directing this part of the road to be opened to the width of twenty-six feet, and “ that Hamilton should have the use and benefit of the timber thereon, necessary and convenient for the making and establishing said road.” Upon the return of this report, a motion was made on behalf of Sawyer that it be set aside. It was contended, that the act of Assembly under which the Commissioners had laid out the road, was unconstitutional; that it provided for the establishment of a turnpike road for the exclusive benefit of an individual, without indemnifying those persons across whose lands the road was to be laid out: that it deprived one citizen of his freehold and vested it in another, at the will of the commissioners. It was further contended, that the road was laid out without notice to Sawyer, and on that account the report ought to be set aside. Upon the argument of this case in Camden Superior Court, his honour Judge Taylor, who presided, *254was of opinion that the report ought to be set aside» on the ground that the act of Assembly under which the Commissioners had laid out the road, was unconstitutional and void. The case was sent to this Court for the opinion of the Judges, and